Old U.S. Courthouse

[trailerkid]

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 487600.htm
I curse the idiots who oppose this. This isn't about them, its about something greater, downtown.

I support the move downtown, but I respect the feelings of the faculty and staff of UMKC Law. They really have no valid reasons to leave where they're at.

[trailerkid]

KC(P) has a rumor on the front page that this buidling may have a reuse as housing...

I wouldn't mind housing, but it'd be nice to see this building used for some sort of gpublic/government offices or commercial uses.

[Highlander]

KC(P) has a rumor on the front page that this buidling may have a reuse as housing...

I wouldn't mind housing, but it'd be nice to see this building used for some sort of gpublic/government offices or commercial uses.

Given the building's shape, amount of windows, and an interior built for courtrooms, housing seems like a strange choice. Be interesting to see how they would make it work.

[KCPowercat]

there has to be a better use than housing for this building.

[ComandanteCero]

these are some quotes from that grand housing article in the Star a couple days ago

Developers are ogling a corridor where no housing now exists. Catching their eyes are a 17-story building at 1006 Grand Blvd., the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City's headquarters and the old U.S. Courthouse.

The transformation also would alter the vision of the Downtown Corridor Development Strategy, better known as the Sasaki plan, prepared three years ago for the Civic Council of Greater Kansas City. The plan said the scale of Grand Boulevard's historic buildings "suggests an ideal opportunity for reuse as an educational campus in the heart of Downtown."

Another reuse candidate is the former U.S. Courthouse at 811 Grand Blvd.

Michael Brincks, a General Services Administration official in Kansas City, said he's working on another plan for the building. The effort to establish a center for nonprofit and educational groups stalled when it failed to recruit the University of Missouri-Kansas City's School of Law.

Although the courthouse's layout isn't amenable for housing, other residential rehabs are likely nearby.

Andi Udris, CEO of the Economic Development Corp. of Kansas City, said demand is spurring the move toward housing.

"If the market says housing is a better use, you throw the old plan out," he said.

David Frantze, co-chairman of the Civic Council, said downtown housing's future would fulfill the Sasaki plan's intent.

"The overall focus is for more street life," said Frantze, a lawyer with Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP. "These concepts are consistent with the concept of reinvigorating Downtown."

I agree it will add more people downtown, but come on, there's a reason the Sasaki plan said this would great for educational facilities. You cant' easily convert every building into housing, and i don't know how hot an idea that is to be converting every standing building into housing. They should try to get one of these smaller private universities (like Rockhurst or Avila) to start a program down there.

[FangKC]

They should do a switcharoo. Get Park University to move out of the old Graphic Arts Building at 10th and Wyandotte and into the old Federal Courthouse. Courtrooms would make decent classrooms.

Then convert the Graphic Arts Building into either office lofts, or housing. Either would be good. I think housing would work in that building. Fill up all the old buildings with housing and when the office market returns, then build new.

[scooterj]

They should do a switcharoo. Get Park University to move out of the old Graphic Arts Building at 10th and Wyandotte and into the old Federal Courthouse. Courtrooms would make decent classrooms.

Then convert the Graphic Arts Building into either office lofts, or housing. Either would be good. I think housing would work in that building. Fill up all the old buildings with housing and when the office market returns, then build new.

I dunno, who'd want to live in a place where live music and karaoke will be taking place literally right outside their bedroom windows every night?

(Office lofts could work there though.)

[FangKC]

I dunno, who'd want to live in a place where live music and karaoke will be taking place literally right outside their bedroom windows every night?
(Office lofts could work there though.)

The people who work in the bar might want to live in the apartments because of the convenience. It wouldn't bother them because they wouldn't be at home until after the place closed. John's is really only noisy on Thursday nights during the summer when they have concerts on the deck outside.
The other obvious candidates would be barflys. Actually, you'd be surprised how many people don't mind outside noise. There are lots of apartments that sit over restaurants and bars in New York City, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, New Orleans, Miami, and Philadelphia. Some people thrive on that type of atmosphere. People who work night jobs also wouldn't be bothered too much by the noise because they would be at work while the worse part was happening. How different really would the Graphics Arts apartments be than say the Library Lofts West (old Board of Trade), or the Sosland Envelope & Press Co. building, where lofts are being developed? Both are just across the street.

Any developer can remedy that problem if sound-proof windows are installed to buffer the noise. Heavy curtains will also help. I lived one block from one of the largest emergency room's in New York City and had ambulances going by night and day. When I closed the window, my apartment was really quiet.

Most of the time, downtown Kansas City is really quiet in the evenings. John's is actually an island of vibrant life in the library district during the summer.

[FangKC]

Ah, Park Univ. is expanding. Maybe the switch could happen.
-------------------
Sun, Nov. 14, 2004

Park University's plans for growth are ambitious

By MIKE SHERRY
The Kansas City Star

Back in the 1880s, Park College students quarried limestone on campus to erect a commanding building overlooking the Missouri River in Parkville.

More than a century after the completion of Mackay Hall, and four years after the school became a university, Park is still thinking big.

Park University is in the midst of one of the most ambitious efforts in the school's nearly 130-year history: The “Explorations and Transformations 2012â€

[trailerkid]

The UMKC Law School move to downtown is not dead yet. UMKC Chancellor Gilliland issued a memo to reconsider the move despite faculty objections. This, among her other recommendations, has caused a vote of "no confidence" in her among professors at the institution.

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 818.htm?1c

I think they should move the UMKC Law School downtown. I've noticed on KU's campus, the law school is somewhat isolated on the campus with many of the students and staff seemingly removed from the "typical college" environment near them. Provide very fast transit between the UMKC downtown and main campus-- I see no problem with it

[CrossroadsKid]

As much as I would like to go to school downtown where I live, the faculty is very against the proposition. They feel it is important to be part of a university atmosphere. Some have expressed opposition b/c of the uncertainty of downtowns future (I have expressed this is diminishing everyday if not gone already). As for the university feel, the only thing I take advantage of on the main campus is the gym. Other than that, no one ventures outside the law school, so we are not getting the university atmosphere they speak of.

[trailerkid]

Other than that, no one ventures outside the law school, so we are not getting the university atmosphere they speak of.

I think this is a key point. As I was saying about KU, law schoolers and undergrads aren't really on the same wavelength. I can understand the need for other grad students to be near undergrads and other programs, but I don't see the need for law school. I really don't think it matters where a building is located specifically for a program that is not integrated into many other parts of the university.

I'm really hoping that the law faculty resistance isn't motivated by selfish reasons like commute time or bad feelings towards downtown, but I have a feeling that is a big part of it.

[chrizow]

as a law student i can attest that among most law students (and other professional students and probably most grad students), the interaction between us and "campus" is attenuated at best.

the MU law school is smack dab in the center of campus, but we rarely leave. Hulston Hall is called Hulston High, because we are in there all day every day with the same people, same profs, we have lockers, etc. heh.

honestly, they could probably move the law school anywhere in columbia and it wouldn't matter that much to most people, especially those that came to MU Law from another undergraduate institution (or the workforce).

professional students tend to treat school more as a "job" whereas undergrad was just like hanging out and maybe going to class, haha. thus, the undergrad experience is much more about the "campus" and community and the amenities on campus. law students emerge bleary-eyed from Hulston High and stumble to Chipotle or Shakespeare's for lunch.

also, i think that professional students and grad students (myself included to an extent) sort of sneer at the undergrads. haha. the campus Commons is literally 100 ft. away, but law students go there pretty rarely. i am more likely to walk somewhere downtown to get food or coffee than the Commons. it's like we are separated from the "campus" academically, but we also separate ourselves on purpose and shut ourselves off in our insular little world.

that said, i am personally glad the law school is on the main campus, because if you have to access to administrative building, the main library, the rec center, or any other campus amenity, those amenities are at most a 10-minute walk away.

i know that some law schools (e.g. Northwestern U) have their law schools COMPLETELY off the main campus (the NW law school is downtown). i think that does a disservice to the students. while we are separated from the rest of the campus community in many ways (intentionally and not), there is still a benefit to being around the bustle of campus and having access to those amenities.

that said, the UMKC law school facility isn't all that great, and a new facility would be awesome. but a move downtown? i dunno about that.

[ComandanteCero]

actually i would say the downtown law school of Northwestern is pretty great for the students, mostly cause they've already had the undergrad experience and want to be in a place closer to where the actual real life of the city happens (instead of evanston which is more small town/suburban atmosphere). It seems Northwestern's three big grad schools (medical, law, and business) are all downtown. Most of the grad students get apartments in the city and basically enjoy all the amenities of downtown Chicago while going to school and living on their own. Evanston being so far up north is best left for the undergrad community which is pretty insular anyway. That said, downtown Chicago and downtown KC are completely different in terms of amenities and energy and bustle, so it makes sense for the grad schools to be in downtown Chitown where most of the professional law, business and medical action happens anyway. But in KC downtown doesn't offer the same logic for moving right now. Maybe in 15-20 years it will make more sense to do it.

[trailerkid]

you have to access to administrative building, the main library, the rec center, or any other campus amenity, those amenities are at most a 10-minute walk away.

If this is the best reason for keeping the law school where it is...it's not very convincing.

[chrizow]

proximity to necessary campus buildings isn't a good reason? isn't that why we have "campuses," so things are closer?

what's the good reason for moving it anyway? heh.

[trailerkid]

proximity to necessary campus buildings isn't a good reason? isn't that why we have "campuses," so things are closer?

what's the good reason for moving it anyway? heh.

1. A chance for the law school to increase its presence in the community and possibly enhance its credibility as an institution regionally.

2. Provide Downtown KC with a respectable educational institution, which provides an attractive element to downtown's "urban fabric." (More young people living and working downtown)

3. Put students in an environment near major government, business, and civic institutions. Integrate the law school campus into "the real world."

4. Transform a downtown landmark into a state-of-the-art learning facility.

5. I believe there are other UMKC programs based almost exclusively at Hospital Hill and UMKC has a pretty comprehensive bus service that could easily be expanded to the CBD.

Now if we could just get that MU Med School moved to KC, we'd be set!

[FangKC]

I know little about the quality of education or the politics of UMKC. However, this appears to be an institutional shakeup. One wonders if the MU president Elson Floyd and board of trustees have instructed the chancellor of UMKC that fundamental changes must be made to the campus--ones that the faculty resist. It also causes me to wonder if she was placed in the job as a transitional chancellor. This type of leader is placed in the job to make drastic and unpopular changes and endure a lot of controversy, then moves on to another job to the same. There are people in the private sector that serve this function.

I don't know if this is a trend or not, but I do know that Arizona State University is planning a large downtown campus in Phoenix which is about 20 minutes away from the main campus.

The goal of moving the university to focus more on developing a professional workforce may explain the continued expansion of the schools of health sciences near Truman Med, and Children's Mercy, and the continued pursuit of placing the School of Law downtown. It would not be a surprise if UMKC also announced plans to expand their business school downtown.

The past rumors of moving the School of Medicine from Columbia to Kansas City may be fueled in part by this type of strategy. Medicine is advancing at an expotential rate. The knowledge a future doctor must gain is much more technical in nature. Scientific research and medicine are becoming more intergrated. Moving the School of Medicine to KC would provide an opportunity to increase biomedical research via the Stower's Institute and Research Medical Center. On a more practical level, the variety and scope of complicated medical cases would probably be greater in Kansas City than Columbia--increasing the chances for exposure and experience to medical students. People with complicated medical problems tend to go to big cities instead of smaller cities like Columbia. Thus, the opportunities for research are greater.

Kansas City also has a greater variety of hospitals that can provide training opportunities. It would also be much cheaper for the University to not have to buy PET scanners, and gamma ray knives, for the University Med. Center in Columbia and instead just use the equipment that large hospital systems already have. This type of equipment is very expensive and often only one or two hospitals in a wide area has them. A city like Columbia might not draw enough patients to justify such an expense.

It would also be easier to attract higher quality medical faculty to Kansas City than Columbia. The competition for talented faculty that conduct high-quality and advanced research is great. They are attracted to larger cities with a lot of amenities. Faculty members--especially medical specialists--also usually prefer to maintain financially successful medical practices as well. Kansas City has a far greater cachement area for drawing in patients, and supporting medical practices.

Large hospitals also like to have medical school faculty on staff. It provides them a greater level of expertise and prestige. Since a faculty physician gets income from the School of Medicine and their own private medical practices, the hospital can attract higher quality staff that they might not be able to afford on their own.

Faculty physicians whom are experts in their field are also cash cows for medical centers. A noted heart surgeon, cancer specialist, or fertility specialist can draw in more affluent patients that can afford to pay their bills, which subsidizes those who cannot. A cash cow physician also keeps a constant stream of patients using services for which the hospital can independently bill, i.e. lab services, inpatient and outpatient services, medical testing, income from surgery, and rehabilitation. This keeps the beds filled and the salaried staff, who are a fixed cost, busy.

Doctors doing internships at hospitals also prefer getting their training from faculty physicians, that are also doing medical research, than just ordinary staff physicians at hospitals that aren't. Academic medical centers therefore can attract much higher quality residents, whom are the lifeblood of hospitals since they provide most of the staffing. Young doctors want to be trained by the experts in their fields, not just run-of-the-mill salaried staff physicians. Faculty phsicians also tend to bring in government grants for research that helps staff and support hospital labs and other related programs.

As for the law school, it might be easier to attract law faculty, part-time instructors, and speakers to a downtown branch campus since there are a lot of lawyers working nearby already, and it would be much more convenient for them.

Depending on how UMKC plans to reconfigure itself, infastructure issues may come to play a part in decision-making. It might be cheaper to move some schools out of their current facilities into already existing downtown buildings on Grand, where space exists, than to build new buildings on campus. Then UMKC could expand other programs into the vacated buildings on campus instead of having to purchase land and build new.

[Pork Chop]

Sometimes tenure is an obstacle to change

By KEVIN COLLISON

The Kansas City Star


I'm sorry to see Martha Gilliland go as chancellor of the University of Missouri-Kansas City.

Not that I knew her well, but she appeared to be determined to shake the school's reputation as a sleepy former municipal university and push it toward becoming something much more dynamic and important to the region's future.

My sole dealings with Gilliland were during last winter and spring's ill-fated effort to relocate the UMKC Law School to the old U.S. Courthouse at 811 Grand Blvd.

It seemed a marriage made in heaven. Hugh Zimmer, who has the development rights to the vacant landmark, had put together a deal in which UMKC would have been able to move the 500 students and faculty of the law school into the building at no cost, and have a $10 million allowance for finishing space.

The law school would get a new downtown home and much higher profile, the university would have its former building for campus expansion, and the quiet corner of Ninth and Grand would have some much-needed activity.

When the idea was first brought up in November 2003, the faculty wouldn't even listen. The word then — and now — was the professors were comfortable living close to the Volker campus and didn't want their routine disrupted.

Gilliland asked them to take some time to study the idea. Alumni and civic leaders urged the school to take advantage of the opportunity to establish a stronger identity, offer students the chance to be next door to the courts and major law firms and for the institution to become a bigger player in the community.

They pointed out outstanding law schools around the United States that were removed from the main campus like Northwestern University in Chicago and Georgetown University in Washington, D.C.

Sweeteners were offered that included a pledge the school would receive $750,000 annually for 10 years from outside sources to boost its budget, maybe even $1.5 million a year if things went well; the chance to upgrade its library with other law libraries nearby; and the possibility of cool downtown student housing.

All that Gilliland and backers of the idea got in return was tired rhetoric about downtown being unsafe and concerns about parking. This despite the fact a 1,200-space garage would be built right next door, a garage that also would be used by federal judges and employees. Let's talk security.

Remember, these objections were coming from well-educated people, some of whom we presume have been around and know how to separate the myth from reality about downtowns.

Nah. Despite all the incentives, despite the opportunity to teach in rooms where giants such as Thurgood Marshall once worked, the faculty overwhelmingly rejected the idea last May.

And what did Gilliland do? She dropped the idea. In fact, she even found a silver lining in the faculty's rejection, saying their responses to a survey showed they really cared about improving the law school.

Gee, how nice.

And then, just to show how conciliatory they were, the law school faculty voted 18-0 to approve a no-confidence measure in Gilliland last month.

Change is hard. Change when you have tenure apparently is nearly impossible.

To reach Kevin Collison,

call (816) 234-4289 or send e-mail to kcollison@kcstar.com.

[trailerkid]

to Collison.